Shellfish aquaculture and First Nations' sovereignty: The quest for sustainable development in contested sea space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aquaculture tenures or leases have become an increasingly important management tool for regulating access rights to coastal and offshore marine habitat. Tenure, as a form of private property rights to marine space, is generally considered a prerequisite for aquaculture development, as are the associated exclusive access rights which provide necessary incentives for producers to invest in infrastructure. The shellfish industry in British Columbia (BC), Canada, is presented as a case study of a transition from a primarily common property wild fishery to a rights‐based system for aquaculture. In BC, seafood production has grown substantially during the past two decades as a result of aquaculture production. However, despite the inherent economic advantages of the tenuring system for increasing seafood production, rights to aquaculture sites in BC remain highly controversial, particularly in response to environmental concerns and infringements on Aboriginal territorial claims. Shellfish farming has, to‐date, been far less controversial than salmon farming; however, shellfish aquaculture has not been uniformly adopted across the province, and analyses of industry capacity or economic opportunities for coastal communities have failed to adequately explain development patterns. This paper, which identifies perceptions of the risks and benefits of the shellfish aquaculture tenuring system, presents the results of 56 interviews conducted with individuals involved in shellfish production in BC. Results indicate that heightened perceptions of risk about shellfish aquaculture tenuring are related to unresolved Aboriginal territorial claims, economic dependence on wild shellfish resources, as well as place‐based values favouring access to wild resources. Underlying values and cultural understandings also strongly shape public perceptions of the risks of aquaculture, and as such, influence local decisions to either accept or resist industry growth. In this case, interviewees' risk perceptions were found to be more important indicators of the potential for industry expansion than studies of capacity or economic cost‐benefit analyses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".